Gun control and the attempt to recall Colorado Sen. John Morse

Here is an idea for state Sen. John Morse, who faces a possible recall. His supporters should start a petition getting the required number of signatures or even more to show that his constituents do back his votes on gun issues.
If recalls are going to happen every time an opposing side doesn’t get their way, we are headed for anarchy. Ninety-one percent of the public supports some gun control. There must be enough guns already that everyone in this could be killed 10 times.

Patricia Allingham, Centennial

This letter was published in the June 13 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

“If recalls are going to happen every time an opposing side doesn’t get their way, we are headed for anarchy.”

Well stated. Same with this idiotic statehood idea.
A bunch of sore losers, not willing or too lazy, to organize and replace these people at their next election.
Nobody tried to recall Speaker McNulty last year when he played games with same-sex civil unions. Instead, a Democrat opposed him — and the opponent got creamed. That’s going to happen. But enough Democrats replaced Republicans that they were able to pass the legislation they want, and presumably the people who voted for the Democrats wanted, just like when voters created Republican majorities in the state legislature, and the Republicans passed their agenda.

primafacie

It can’t be anarchy by definition — using the voting process to achieve a governmental solution.

But it is a misuse of the recall provision. Not that I can offer a public-policy remedy — if a group of like-minded individuals want to organize such a drive, the election process allows for that.

The burden is to demonstrate and prove that the targeted elected official has done more than merely disagree with a vocal segment of the electorate.

Fowler

I can’t agree it’s misuse. It’s a fundamental constitutional right under the Colorado constitution. It’s a means to recall an elected official without having to wait years for another election and possibly incur more “damage” from a wayward official. The burden and costs are high, but at times it’s the only way to proceed if a sufficient number of voters agree that a recall is appropriate. It failed in Durango but may succeed in Colorado Springs – let them decide it according to the law. I’m certain the folks in Wisconsin believed that a recall of Scott Walker was worth the effort even though it failed. Messy, expensive, partisan? Yes, but democracy is often like that.

peterpi

The sore losers in Wisconsin could have saved all that time and money, and challenged him better when Scott came up for re-election. And I say that as a liberal sympathetic to their cause.
Scott said he was going to do certain things, and he did. He didn’t use state treasury funds to corner the market on Antarctica orange groves. He didn’t go nude skinny-dipping in the statehouse reflecting pool and boast about it on YouTube. He didn’t sic the state patrol on his opponents. He enacted what he said he would enact. The opponents didn’t like it. But that’s what the next election was for.
Same here with these state reps and senators. They voted a certain way. Some of their constituents didn’t like it. Well, waaah, cry me a river.
It’s a misuse of the recall process.

Fowler

It obviously depends on what particular issue gets you riled up and whether you have enough petitioners to move the recall forward. For you it seems to be fraud, corruption, or skinny-dipping (not that there’s anything wrong with that in my book 😉 ). For others it’s the 2nd Amendment – it’s up to the voters to decide at this point. The Constitution doesn’t impose a litmus test on what specific issues merit a recall, which is a good thing IMO.

peterpi

We’ll have to disagree amicably.
I see recall as akin to an impeachment process. You view it more broadly.
Regarding skinny-dipping, it depends on how physically fit the skinny-dipper is, LOL

Recalls, impeachments and the like ought to be reserved for quantifiable wrongdoing, not political disagreements.

anywoman

disagree peterpi. It wasn’t the content of the emotionally driven flawed laws alone that prompted this constituent to sign the recall petition. It was Morse turning our state house into a Hollyweird type stage for his arrogant self promotion. Denying Coloradans a voice while accommodating the pseudo-celebrity Mark Kelly, retired astronaut and non-Colorado resident unlimited time to speak to proposed laws that he had neither read nor would be subject to was the final straw. Especially once I learned that Kelly had purchased two weapons less than 48 hours before jetting to Colorado to promote himself.

toohip

This sounds like a good idea – especially to counter such “anarchists” who have knee-jerk reactions like this, to recall a representative of your opposing political view that actually has the courage to vote with their party and also, with the majority. If every time one of our representatives from the opposing party didn’t vote as we want them too, and we initiated a recall vote, there would be a lot of wasted time by some and our gov’t to hold recall petition counts, verification, and possibly a recall election. But that’s democracy, right?

Fowler

It’s not anarchy to utilize a fundamental constitutional right to recall an elected official.

peterpi

As primafacie said, it’s not anarchy but it is misuse. Not voting the way you like isn’t nearly on the same level as gross misconduct like taking bribes, for example. Now, maybe under Colorado law, people have the right to recall an elected official because he wears Raiders T-shirts at sporting events, but that would still be a misuse.

We don’t elect representatives and senators to be rubber-stamp dummies. We expect them to think and decide for themselves on our behalf.
If you don’t like the way an elected official voted, organize and elect someone else at the next election.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.